Getting 360 Degree Reviews Right

Many of the charter schools we work with are adopting 360s as an element of their leadership development plan. We highly recommend this if used for development purposes only, not as part of the leadership’s performance review.

We thought we would share this article from the Harvard Business Review as it highlights the impact of a thorough and effective process.

Written by Jack Zenger and Joseph Folkman Harvard Business Review

We’ve all watched countless
late-night infomercials regarding a new product or self-help program. As it
ends, the person on the TV screen testifies that this new vitamin or exercise
process has “changed my life.” We assume we’re not alone in our skepticism
about how life transforming this new product really was. Indeed, as we mature,
it seems that fewer and fewer things actually make a long-term difference in
our lives.

But there is one thing we’ve
personally seen that profoundly and consistently changes lives — what’s
generally referred to as the 360-degree feedback process. In the course of
completing tens of thousands of these reviews as part of our strength-based
leadership programs, we had an up-close view of many people who were teetering
on the edge of job termination, and have seen them blossom into extremely
valuable contributors. It’s been one of the really gratifying parts of our
work.

Maybe that’s why our blood comes
to a slow boil when we see a popular
columnist arguing that 360-degree feedback
programs fail. Of course, a careful reading of the article describes an
entirely flawed implementation of a 360 process, and we grudgingly concur that
this does happen. Sometimes the senior executives don’t support the program,
and in the worst cases they don’t participate themselves. Perhaps reports go to
participants with little or no explanation of how to read them and without
follow-up from the manager or HR. Or perhaps the 360 isn’t used to guide and
inform people’s progress within an overall system of development. Yes, we sigh,
there are too many 360 implementations that are pathetic wastes of time,
resources, and — worst of all — opportunity.

That’s why we take heart when we
see organizations do 360s well. What do they do that makes the difference?

They begin by measuring the right skills, relying on
empirical research to determine which leadership competencies really make a
difference to the performance of their firm, rather than on some senior
executive’s beliefs about what makes a good manager.

They take the time to properly explain, both to
participants and to the people giving feedback about those participants, why
they’ve going through the exercise and how the data will be used for the
participant’s development.

They make certain, and make it known, that there will
be no breaches of confidentiality.

They create a survey that requires just 15 to 20
minutes to complete, to avoid the survey fatigue that tortuously long
instruments cause.

They focus primarily on discovering strengths rather
than use the process to uncover deficiencies. Yes, the process sometimes
identifies major weaknesses that need to be taken seriously, but in our
experience, these have been in the minority of cases.

They tailor the results to each individual and to his
or her position. Everyone doesn’t need to be good at the same things.

They present each person’s results in a way that
enables them to digest them constructively and use the data to create a
personal plan of development. They make the feedback report itself simple to
read, presenting data in a graphical format that is easy to absorb.

They design a final report to help participants see
how they compare to those in the top quartile and in the top 10%. This elevates
everyone’s aspirations. No one leaves feeling complacent about being slightly
above average.

They include a mini-employee survey that shows
managers the impact of their behavior on their subordinates.

The effectiveness of any measure
is based on how well that metric can predict an outcome. Will the number of
leads generated by a marketing campaign predict sales? Will the number of
hurricanes in the Gulf predict the price of gas? Will the number of times a new
product is mentioned in social media predict the success of that product? What
we know from our years of research correlating leaders’ 360 ratings to
important organizational outcomes is that they are very predictive. While no
one person’s opinion is in itself necessarily predictive, the aggregate average
of several raters really does provide a very accurate gauge of the skills of a
leader. Our research shows that individuals rated through this process as
highly effective leaders preside over operations in which turnover is lower —
and employee engagement, customer satisfaction, and sales are higher.

That said, there is one 360 rater
who is highly unreliable and rarely predictive at all. As all our data and our
long experience have shown us time and time again, that person is you. That is,
your own perception of yourself is rarely accurate or predictive. For a GPS
system to get an accurate picture of your location, it requires four different
satellites. For leaders to get an accurate picture of their own effectiveness,
they need feedback from their manager, peers, direct reports, and others in the
organization.

Certainly, 360-degree feedback
can be done well or poorly. But we are heartened when we see the process done
well, because we know that virtually every time that happens, someone’s life
will indeed be transformed in a positive way. In a very real sense, it can be
one of the rare activities that truly does influence careers and change lives.